IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v24y2013i5p1068-1080..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A meta-analysis of correlated behaviors with implications for behavioral syndromes: relationships between particular behavioral traits

Author

Listed:
  • László Zsolt Garamszegi
  • Gábor Markó
  • Gábor Herczeg

Abstract

Behavioral syndromes predict that individuals display behaviors consistently across different ecological situations, resulting in correlations among functionally different individual-specific behaviors (e.g., activity, exploration, aggression, and risk taking). Such consistencies can arise because of the common innate government of traits (i.e., temperament). However, different behaviors can be mediated by different selection regimes and/or measured with different errors. Furthermore, contextual overlap among traits may also vary. These possibilities can cause dissimilarities in the pair-wise relationship between particular traits. To determine the relationships among the most studied behaviors, we performed a modern meta-analysis, in which we assessed the strength of correlations in each possible combination of traits. Relying on data from 81 scientific papers, we found that the correlations among behaviors were generally weak and that they varied in magnitude across comparisons (e.g., novel environment exploration and activity: r = 0.345; novel object exploration and activity: r = 0.074). The partial correlations among traits revealed that certain relationships (e.g., novel environment exploration/activity and the novel object exploration/risk taking) were independent of the covariation with other traits, whereas certain relationships (e.g., aggression/novel environment exploration) consistently weakened after controlling for covariance. Some relationships were affected by contextual overlap: the effect sizes were systematically higher when the behaviors were assayed in the same experimental compartment (e.g., same test room or aquarium). Different correlations are unlikely to emerge due to differences in repeatabilities that are associated with the measurement of different traits, as we found that averaged repeatabilities vary around the same intermediate magnitude for each behavior. We suggest that the most commonly assessed behavioral traits do not necessarily form equally independent domains.

Suggested Citation

  • László Zsolt Garamszegi & Gábor Markó & Gábor Herczeg, 2013. "A meta-analysis of correlated behaviors with implications for behavioral syndromes: relationships between particular behavioral traits," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(5), pages 1068-1080.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:24:y:2013:i:5:p:1068-1080.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/art033
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David M. Logue & Sandeep Mishra & David McCaffrey & Deborah Ball & William H. Cade, 2009. "A behavioral syndrome linking courtship behavior toward males and females predicts reproductive success from a single mating in the hissing cockroach, Gromphadorhina portentosa," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 20(4), pages 781-788.
    2. John P A Ioannidis, 2005. "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-1, August.
    3. Niels Jeroen Dingemanse & Piet de Goede, 2004. "The relation between dominance and exploratory behavior is context-dependent in wild great tits," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 15(6), pages 1023-1030, November.
    4. Sue Duval & Richard Tweedie, 2000. "Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel-Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 455-463, June.
    5. Congdon, P., 2005. "Bayesian predictive model comparison via parallel sampling," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 735-753, April.
    6. Viechtbauer, Wolfgang, 2010. "Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 36(i03).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laurane Winandy & Mathieu Denoël, 2015. "The aggressive personality of an introduced fish affects foraging behavior in a polymorphic newt," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(6), pages 1528-1536.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Furukawa, Chishio, 2019. "Publication Bias under Aggregation Frictions: Theory, Evidence, and a New Correction Method," EconStor Preprints 194798, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    2. Bart Verkuil & Serpil Atasayi & Marc L Molendijk, 2015. "Workplace Bullying and Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis on Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Augusteijn, Hilde Elisabeth Maria & van Aert, Robbie Cornelis Maria & van Assen, Marcel A. L. M., 2021. "Posterior Probabilities of Effect Sizes and Heterogeneity in Meta-Analysis: An Intuitive Approach of Dealing with Publication Bias," OSF Preprints avkgj, Center for Open Science.
    4. Georgiou, George K. & Guo, Kan & Naveenkumar, Nithya & Vieira, Ana Paula Alves & Das, J.P., 2020. "PASS theory of intelligence and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Nian-Feng Wan & Liwan Fu & Matteo Dainese & Yue-Qing Hu & Lars Pødenphant Kiær & Forest Isbell & Christoph Scherber, 2022. "Plant genetic diversity affects multiple trophic levels and trophic interactions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Kim, Yeolib & Kim, Seung Hyun & Peterson, Robert A. & Choi, Jeonghye, 2023. "Privacy concern and its consequences: A meta-analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    7. K. Praveen Parboteeah & Matthias Weiss & Martin Hoegl, 2024. "Ethical Climates Across National Contexts: A Meta-Analytical Investigation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 189(3), pages 573-590, January.
    8. Woodley of Menie, Michael A. & Peñaherrera-Aguirre, Mateo & Sarraf, Matthew A., 2022. "Signs of a Flynn effect in rodents? Secular differentiation of the manifold of general cognitive ability in laboratory mice (Mus musculus) and Norwegian rats (Rattus norvegicus) over a century—Results," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    9. Stav Fainshmidt & Amir Pezeshkan & M. Lance Frazier & Anil Nair & Edward Markowski, 2016. "Dynamic Capabilities and Organizational Performance: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation and Extension," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1348-1380, December.
    10. Jaskiewicz, Peter & Block, Joern & Wagner, Dominik & Carney, Michael & Hansen, Christopher, 2021. "How do cross-country differences in institutional trust and trust in family explain the mixed performance effects of family management? A meta-analysis," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 56(5).
    11. Bernhard Voelkl & Lucile Vogt & Emily S Sena & Hanno Würbel, 2018. "Reproducibility of preclinical animal research improves with heterogeneity of study samples," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-13, February.
    12. Anouk Decuypere & Wilmar Schaufeli, 2021. "Exploring the Leadership–Engagement Nexus: A Moderated Meta-Analysis and Review of Explaining Mechanisms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-34, August.
    13. Haiko Schurz & Michelle Daya & Marlo Möller & Eileen G Hoal & Muneeb Salie, 2015. "TLR1, 2, 4, 6 and 9 Variants Associated with Tuberculosis Susceptibility: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-24, October.
    14. Kadykalo, Andrew N. & Findlay, C. Scott, 2016. "The flow regulation services of wetlands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 91-103.
    15. Mattia Marchi & Antonio Travascio & Daniele Uberti & Edoardo De Micheli & Fabio Quartaroli & Giuseppe Laquatra & Pietro Grenzi & Luca Pingani & Silvia Ferrari & Andrea Fiorillo & Manlio Converti & Fed, 2024. "Microaggression toward LGBTIQ people and implications for mental health: A systematic review," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 70(1), pages 23-35, February.
    16. Lang, Jessica & Ochsmann, Elke & Kraus, Thomas & Lang, Jonas W.B., 2012. "Psychosocial work stressors as antecedents of musculoskeletal problems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of stability-adjusted longitudinal studies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(7), pages 1163-1174.
    17. David B. Yaden & Cassondra L. Batz-Barbarich & Vincent Ng & Hoda Vaziri & Jessica N. Gladstone & James O. Pawelski & Louis Tay, 2022. "A Meta-Analysis of Religion/Spirituality and Life Satisfaction," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 4147-4163, December.
    18. Sergio Nolazco & Kaspar Delhey & Shinichi Nakagawa & Anne Peters, 2022. "Ornaments are equally informative in male and female birds," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    19. Friederike Teetzen & Paul-Christian Bürkner & Sabine Gregersen & Sylvie Vincent-Höper, 2022. "The Mediating Effects of Work Characteristics on the Relationship between Transformational Leadership and Employee Well-Being: A Meta-Analytic Investigation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-26, March.
    20. Tsung-Yuan Hsiao & Wen-Ta Tseng, 2022. "A Meta-Analysis of Test-Retest Reliability in Language Anxiety Research: Is Language Anxiety Stable or Variable?," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:24:y:2013:i:5:p:1068-1080.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.